A Science-based Draft Review of ‘My Turn: Immunizations: Critical protection for state's families’

[Guest guest]

Dear Ralph Clapp,

 

     On 'balance', your 19

February 2012 piece

on the burlingtonfreepress.com website titled, "My

Turn:

Immunizations: Critical protection for state's families",

appears to be an example of unsubstantiated and

unsubstantiable pro-vaccine rhetoric

that the vaccine apologists and acolytes use to tout vaccines

and vaccination

programs.

     As such, this article

did not meet my

expectations for someone who: a) is

the director of any chapter of the March of Dimes and claims to use a scientific and

evidence-based approaches to the

issues that you discuss.

     Apparently, you

believe that your

unsupported and unsubstantiated statements have the power to

convince most everyone

who reads this opinion piece that “black is white” when it

comes to vaccines

and vaccination issues.

     Factually, the

statements made in this

article diverge from the facts as I, having

spent more than a decade in studying the vaccination science

as well as working

with others to publish peer-reviewed articles addressing key

vaccine/vaccination issues: a)

understand them and

where appropriate,

provide key supporting

data or citations thereto from recognized federal sources and

peer-reviewed

publications.

     An in-depth, passage

by passage, review of

your article that provides the evidence that supports the

preceding assertions

can be found here.

     As with all of my

in-depth reviews, the

"Introductory Remarks" section includes the following passage,

"Finally,

should anyone find any significant factual error in this review

for which they

have independent [a],

scientifically sound, peer-reviewed, published, substantiating

documents,

please submit that information to this reviewer so that he can

improve his

understanding of factual reality and, where appropriate, revise

his views and

this review.

[a] To

qualify, the study should be published by researchers who have

no conflicts of

interest from their ties to either those commercial entities who

 profit  from

the sale of vaccines or those entities, academic, commercial or

governmental,

who actively promote inoculation programs using vaccines."

    

     Hopefully, you will provide an in-depth,

fact- and science- based rebuttal to those statements for which

you or your

colleagues and supporters have and can provide qualified

documents (see

footnote "[a]"), which support the assertions in your

cited

article and/or correct any significant factual errors in my

review so that you

may improve my understanding of factual reality and help me to

revise my views

and my review of your opinion article that was published on the

burlingtonfreepress.com web site.

 

Respectfully,

 

G. King, PhD

http://www.dr-king.com

 

The

Reviewer and Founder, FAME Systems

 

PS:

If you want a "doc" copy to more easily copy out the Table

elements

in a manner that

       preserves their

fidelity, then you need

only send an email with: "REVUWalterClapp_PGK"

       in the subject line.

[Guest guest]

Brilliant review, as usual, Dr. King!

With much gratitude,